Cited by 145Health disparities and outcomesSocial impacts of COVID-19Public Health and Social Inequalities

Are we all in this together? Longitudinal assessment of cumulative adversities by socioeconomic position in the first 3 weeks of lockdown in the UK

Open access
Wright, Liam, Steptoe, Andrew, Fancourt, Daisy·2020·Journal of Epidemiology and Community Health

Abstract

Background: Despite media claims that coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is uniting societies and countries in shared experience, there has been concern that the pandemic is in fact exposing and widening existing inequalities within societies. Data have shown these differences for cases and fatalities, but data on other types of adversities are lacking. Therefore, this study explored the changing patterns of adversity relating to the COVID-19 pandemic by socioeconomic position (SEP) during the early weeks of lockdown in the UK. Methods: Data were from 12 527 UK adults in the University College London COVID-19 Social Study (a panel study that involves online weekly data collection from participants during the COVID-19 pandemic). We analysed data collected from 25 March to 14 April 2020. The sample was well-stratified and weighted to population proportions of gender, age, ethnicity, education and country of living. We used Poisson and logit models to assess 10 different types of adverse experiences depending on an index of SEP over time. Results: There was a clear gradient across the number of adverse events experienced each week by SEP. This was most clearly seen for adversities relating to finances (including loss of employment and cut in income) and basic needs (including access to food and medications) but less for experiences directly relating to the virus. Inequalities were maintained with no reductions in discrepancies between socioeconomic groups over time. Conclusions: There were clear inequalities in adverse experiences during the COVID-19 pandemic in the early weeks of lockdown in the UK. Results suggest that measures taken to try to reduce such adverse events did not go far enough in tackling inequality.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1136/jech-2020-214475

Cites

26 of 26 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Individuals with lower household income had consistently worse mental health than individuals with higher household income, which has been proposed to be linked to higher experiences of adversities such as job losses, decreases in household income, and challenges to pay bills.

    “Similarly, individuals with lower household income had consistently worse mental health than individuals with a higher household income, which has been proposed to be linked to higher experiences of adversities such as job losses, decreases in household income, and challenges to pay bills.3”

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Wright, L., Steptoe, A., & Fancourt, D.
Affiliations
University College London (GB)
Corresponding author
Fancourt, Daisy
Venue
Journal of Epidemiology and Community Health
Publisher
BMJ
Published
2020-06-05
Volume
74
Issue
9
Pages
683-688
ISSN
  • 0141-7681 (ISSN-L)
  • 0143-005X
  • 1470-2738
OpenAlex
W3033725206
Cited by
145
References
26
Citations by year
2026: 4 · 2025: 6 · 2024: 9 · 2023: 19 · 2022: 29 · 2021: 55 · 2020: 23
FWCI
17.38
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Journal of Epidemiology & Community Health (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • UCL Discovery (University College London) (submittedVersion)
  • HighWire Press Open Archive (submittedVersion)
Funders
  • Wellcome Trust (221400/Z/20/Z, 205407/Z/16/Z)
  • UK Research and Innovation
  • Nuffield Foundation
  • Economic and Social Research Council (ES/S002588/1)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Health › Health disparities and outcomes
  • Social Sciences › Safety Research › Social impacts of COVID-19
  • Social Sciences › Health › Public Health and Social Inequalities
Keywords
COVID-19 pandemic, lockdown, socioeconomic disparities, cumulative adversity, socioeconomic position, financial hardship, job loss, income loss, food insecurity, access to medicines, social determinants of health, United Kingdom
MeSH terms
Betacoronavirus, COVID-19, SARS-CoV-2, Adolescent, Adult, Aged, Aged, 80 and over, Female, United Kingdom, Humans, Income, Male, Middle Aged, Pneumonia, Viral, Quality of Life, Quarantine, Social Conditions, Socioeconomic Factors, Cost of Illness, Coronavirus Infections, Sickness Impact Profile, Young Adult, Economic Recession, Pandemics

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review